The Arab Mega-State Emerges

The United Arab Republic included Egypt and Syria - they tried to pull Yemen in and at one point Libya proposed to join Egypt.
Suppose that after the 1968 war, Nasser (one of the only Arab leaders who ever achieved any popularity) sees a cardiologist and is put on a healthy diet exercise regime as well as blood pressure meds.
He campaigns around the Arab world and is met by larger and larger crowds.
After the 1973 war and oil embargo, the light bulb goes on. There emerges enormous public pressure for an Arab Super State running from the Atlantic Ocean to Iran and from Turkey to the Red Sea. The unifying principle is Arab nationalism so that Christians and Shiites are welcome and enthusiastic supporters of the new state.
Countries fall like dominoes (the Saudi regime resists but is overwhelmed by a combination of internal and external forces) and a unified federation is created which now controls more than half the world's oil reserves. The spigots are immediately ratcheted back and the Western economies take a nosedive.
The new mega-state demands a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a return of Israel to pre-1968 borders, authorization to acquire nuclear weapons, and withdrawal of all Western military forces from the area. Some of these demands (the Security Council seat, the Israeli borders) are granted in an effort to save Western economies from the dire effects of an oil cut off. This success enhances the regimes popularity and allows for more centralization. And there is plenty of moolah to spread around with the oil price being supported at a high level.
Where do we go from here? How would "Arab Unity" have effected the last 50 years?
 
Suppose that after the 1968 war
6 day War was in 1967
Countries fall like dominoes (the Saudi regime resists but is overwhelmed by a combination of internal and external forces) and a unified federation is created which now controls more than half the world's oil reserves.
Saudi Arabia and other gulf states is unlikely to fall. Syria might not join and if it doesn't nether does any state in the Levant but you could have a union between Libya,Egypt,Sudan and Algeria

Israel to pre-1968 border
Not happening without a military victory or something close

authorization to acquire nuclear weapons
Wouldn't bother to get authorization , it would just start trying to get them with Soviet and Pakistani help

How would "Arab Unity" have effected the last 50 years?
Islamist movements in the Arab world are weakened and Radical Islamists will be expelled rather co-oped.if it gets does get Syria and Iraq it would do better against Iran but I'm not sure if it will win but it doesn't get Syria and Iraq it will provide support and troops .As long as South Sudanese autonomy is respected, South Sudan could remain
 
Last edited:
It would have to be in part the result of a popular "Arab Street" uprising in some of the countries. The military in some countries might also go along. It is a long shot but it is not entirely implausible. They all speak the same basic language and have a rather consistent culture. They all have common enemies. And they have been paying a huge price for their failure to work together cohesively.
 

Anchises

Banned
Problem is:

Once the Western public realizes their dependance on Arab oil an Arab super state is out of the question.

A few states forming a Union might work but a Mega-state including the vast oil reserves is out of the question.

The CIA would have a field day because they could easily exploit the massive internal differences of "the Arabs" and Israel (encouraged by the USA) might use military force to prevent this.

And all of that ignores the ASB that is able to bridge the cultural/economic/religious/... differences between the different Arab States. The Arabian states are much to diverse to form a Mega-state. You would need a pre 1900 POD for that in my oppinion.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
Maybe maybe this works. Religion would be a better motivator than oil. It is even then still a stretch and there is oil elsewhere in the world. As to the UN seat too: not happening.
However, no way are you getting Turkey in this. That would bring about a war with the West probably the Soviets too.
 
Maybe maybe this works. Religion would be a better motivator than oil. It is even then still a stretch and there is oil elsewhere in the world. As to the UN seat too: not happening.
However, no way are you getting Turkey in this. That would bring about a war with the West probably the Soviets too.

I assume that Turkey would be their Northern border. I agree that it is unlikely but they said that about German unification in the early 19th century. If they could pull it off, they would have enormous oil wealth and could definitely control the price of world oil for a very long time. I have a good friend who is a Palestinian and he was being critical of various Arab leaders. I said to him that virtually all Arab leaders seem to be very unpopular and I asked whether there had ever been a post World War 2 leader who had widespread popularity. He named two - Nasser and Arafat. Had Nasser lived on and gotten very lucky, it is just possible he might have pulled this off.
The problem with religion as a motivator rather than Arab nationalism is that it sets up Sunni/Shiite conflicts and it excludes Christian Arabs which immediately leads to divisiveness. Better to rally around Arab nationalism and try to modernize and catch up with the West using the tailwind of enormous oil revenue.
 
Turkey and Iran wouldn't fit in or desire to fit in to an Arab super state. Most Egyptians are ethnically Arabs, so are most Iraqis, most Saudis, and so on, and they mostly speak Arabic dialects. Turkey is mostly ethnic Turks speaking Turkish, Iranians are mostly ethnical Persians mostly speaking Persian. The super state is meant as different nations with a shared ethnicity and shared language coming together in a new nation based on those things. These two states have a different nation language and ethnicity.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94680

Maybe maybe this works. Religion would be a better motivator than oil. It is even then still a stretch and there is oil elsewhere in the world. As to the UN seat too: not happening.
However, no way are you getting Turkey in this. That would bring about a war with the West probably the Soviets too.

Except, of course, the very obvious point that religion has been the divider of the "Arab World" since they gained independence.
 
Except, of course, the very obvious point that religion has been the divider of the "Arab World" since they gained independence.

To add to this, unless we're imagining this centuries old divide is gone, we're talking about a nation whose dominant identity is Sunni Arab, and forms on the idea that "we should have one nation"; it isn't formed for Kurds in Iraq or Copts in Egypt, or Sunni anywhere. Non-Muslims are about a quarter of the Middle East (though less when discounting Israel, and a further about 10% of Muslims are Shia. Across this region are tens of thousands who are on the wrong side of the divide, and every power in the region supports them.

Could happen, not saying it is impossible. But the region is not a block.
 
AFAIK who wanted to be united:
  • Egypt
  • Syria
  • Lybia
  • Iraq
  • Jordan (for sone time)
  • West Yemen
I doubt the Kurds of Iraq won't rebel. Also you have Assyrians who are not Arabs, and don't speak Arabic.
Suppose the regime gives them some sort of autonomy.
But still, soutg Yemen is cut off, and Israel is the country which is now literally under siege. The effects it will have on Lebanon are drastic- either the country joins, or is pulled apart, or surrenders parts to the unified Arab country.

What I don't see are the Gulf monarchies joining. Perhaps North Sudan may join, and perhaps Tunisia in later stages
 
What I don't see are the Gulf monarchies joining. Perhaps North Sudan may join, and perhaps Tunisia in later stages
Even if they had revolutions and became republics the new leaders may be reluctant to share their wealth.

How serious was Colonel Gadaffi's desire to become part of an Arab Mega State? He would be a small fish in a big pond and he'd have to share his wealth with the poorer and larger members of the United States of Arabia. The ordinary Libyans might not be keen on the idea either.

It would be a similar situation with Iraq.

Having written that there was a short lived Arab Federation between pre-revolutionary Iraq and Jordan. I have read that Kuwait wanted to join, but it was still a British Protectorate at the time and they vetoed it. Though (AFIAK and ironically) when they were pulling out of the Persian Gulf they tried to create a Greater United Arab Emirates consisting of the actual UAE plus Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Oman.

Had there been no Iraqi Revolution ITTL is there any scope for the Arab Federation to survive and expand to include the Gulf monarchies including Saudi Arabia?
 
Even if they had revolutions and became republics the new leaders may be reluctant to share their wealth.

How serious was Colonel Gadaffi's desire to become part of an Arab Mega State? He would be a small fish in a big pond and he'd have to share his wealth with the poorer and larger members of the United States of Arabia. The ordinary Libyans might not be keen on the idea either.

It would be a similar situation with Iraq.

Having written that there was a short lived Arab Federation between pre-revolutionary Iraq and Jordan. I have read that Kuwait wanted to join, but it was still a British Protectorate at the time and they vetoed it. Though (AFIAK and ironically) when they were pulling out of the Persian Gulf they tried to create a Greater United Arab Emirates consisting of the actual UAE plus Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Oman.

Had there been no Iraqi Revolution ITTL is there any scope for the Arab Federation to survive and expand to include the Gulf monarchies including Saudi Arabia?
AFAIK the OTL Arab Federation was a reaction to the OTL United Arab Republic.

Therefore would a Second Arab Federation consisting of the Arab monarchies come about as a reaction to TTL's Second United Arab Republic? The Second Republic would initially consist of Egypt, Iraq, Libya and Syria with the possibility of Algeria, the Sudan, Tunisia and the Yemens joining later on.
 
How serious was Colonel Gadaffi's desire to become part of an Arab Mega State? He would be a small fish in a big pond and he'd have to share his wealth with the poorer and larger members of the United States of Arabia. The ordinary Libyans might not be keen on the idea either.
given he did try to unite with his neighbors multiple time all which would require him to give up a lot of power ,I would say yes .
 
Had there been no Iraqi Revolution ITTL is there any scope for the Arab Federation to survive and expand to include the Gulf monarchies including Saudi Arabia?
Saudi Arabia opposed the both the Baghdad pact and Arab Federation due to the rivalry with the Hashemites

Except, of course, the very obvious point that religion has been the divider of the "Arab World" since they gained independence.

The modern day conflict between the Shia and Sunni in the Arab world is the result of Islamic revolution, failure of Pan-Arabism and the rise of Islamism and Saddam's back to faith campaign
 
Given he did try to unite with his neighbors multiple time all which would require him to give up a lot of power, I would say yes .
Fair enough. OTOH and AFAIK there wasn't a realistic chance of it happening IOTL so he might have been doing it for political reasons. ITTL with a realistic chance of it happening he might have a change of mind.
Saudi Arabia opposed the both the Baghdad pact and Arab Federation due to the rivalry with the Hashemites.
Point taken. But for this Second Arab Federation there is no Kingdom of Iraq because it's after the revolution leaving the less powerful Jordanian branch of the Hashemites left as rivals. Plus the Saudis have a border with the Second UAR because Iraq one of its provinces.
 
While the Arab Mega State scenario seems unlikely, it does illustrate that if the Arabs had gotten their act together they could have harnessed the oil wealth to produce a nascent superpower with much more leverage in geopolitics and - probably - a much higher standard of living for most of their people. And they could have had much more respect around the world - which is a thing that the Arabs desperately crave. It is the phenomenon illustrated at the end of Lawrence of Arabia - the inability of the Arabs to mediate their differences and work together - that has limited their world influence. And there is no leader presently in a position to pull things together.
 
A good PoD might be to prevent the partition of Palestine. Find some way to tip British favour decisively in favour of the Palestinians and have the UN vote to create a unified Palestinian State, possibly with some commitment to bi-nationalism. In the aftermath Palestine forms a union with Jordan, which was apparently a popular idea among Palestinian elites at the time, and aligns quite closely with Britain. The Suez Crisis breaks out as IOTL and Palestine backs the British. Things still play out as IOTL and the Palestinian government is humiliated and has pissed off every Arab nationalist in the military. Soon after the government is overthrown by an Arab Nationalist coup. The July Revolution in Iraq happens as IOTL. The 1958 Lebanon Crisis happens, but with Palestine able to directly support the rebels the government falls. You now have socialist Arab Nationalist governments in every country between Egypt and Iraq and a strong impetus for union. Have the anti-union military officers in the Syrian Army get exposed removing them as a threat to the project of unification. Maybe throw in a small war with Turkey over Iskanderun to serve as a team building exercise. From there it shouldn't be too much of a challenge to pick up the pieces as the various monarchies and colonies in the region fall.
 
Fair enough. OTOH and AFAIK there wasn't a realistic chance of it happening IOTL so he might have been doing it for political reasons. ITTL with a realistic chance of it happening he might have a change of mind.
considering he tired to overthrow his neighbors who did reject the different unions going so far as to support the South Sudanese during the Sudanese civil war. I doubt he will change his mind
 
A good PoD might be to prevent the partition of Palestine. Find some way to tip British favour decisively in favour of the Palestinians and have the UN vote to create a unified Palestinian State, possibly with some commitment to bi-nationalism. In the aftermath Palestine forms a union with Jordan, which was apparently a popular idea among Palestinian elites at the time, and aligns quite closely with Britain. The Suez Crisis breaks out as IOTL and Palestine backs the British. Things still play out as IOTL and the Palestinian government is humiliated and has pissed off every Arab nationalist in the military. Soon after the government is overthrown by an Arab Nationalist coup. The July Revolution in Iraq happens as IOTL. The 1958 Lebanon Crisis happens, but with Palestine able to directly support the rebels the government falls. You now have socialist Arab Nationalist governments in every country between Egypt and Iraq and a strong impetus for union. Have the anti-union military officers in the Syrian Army get exposed removing them as a threat to the project of unification. Maybe throw in a small war with Turkey over Iskanderun to serve as a team building exercise. From there it shouldn't be too much of a challenge to pick up the pieces as the various monarchies and colonies in the region fall.

Nasser's popularity was at its zenith after the 1956 Suez Crisis which was seen as a major victory for him and a humiliation for the former colonial powers. I think that this may have been the most likely PoD.
 
Top